Yarra Ranges is Stuffed for Motorbikes
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: ROT IN HELL GREEK FUCKWIT....
Next: Garage Night new video: Suspension overhaul starts with Dremelon a lathe
From: hippo on 8 Feb 2010 02:14 Zebee Johnstone wrote: > > In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 8 Feb 2010 05:25:30 +0000 (UTC) > hippo <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1(a)REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote: > > CrazyCam wrote: > >> > >> hippo wrote: > >> > >> <snip> > >> > >> > Let's face it, you can be a hoon on a CT110. It's just a bit harder to > >> > sustain! > >> > >> Give me five and a half grand and I'll sell you a Z50 that you can > >> _seriously_ hoon on. > > > > It'd probably do a rubbish job of carrying 600 newspapers though! > > a bicycle trailer takes care of that. > > As long as it's blue with yellow wheels. > > Zebee > > Hmm... and probably with a rose jointed gooseneck if he's riding it :) -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: hippo on 8 Feb 2010 02:23 G-S wrote: > > Andrew wrote: > > On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 18:37:20 +1100, G-S wrote: > >> People can be hoons without having 'sports bikes' just as people might > >> not be hoons that have them. > >> > >> You I'd suggest are a mild hoon :) > >> > >> > >> G-S > > > > [Apoplectic noises] Mild? *Mild*? *MILD*!!!!!? > > > > Next you'll be calling me beige :-( > > > > That depends.... > > do you use a Mac or a PC? > > Mac people don't do beige ;-) > > > G-S > > Nor is Billy Connolly especially P.C. Apologies if you've heard "a wee beige jobby" before: http://fat.ly/w8h4l -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: Nev.. on 8 Feb 2010 02:24 theo wrote: > On Feb 6, 5:48 pm, "Nev.." <id...(a)mindless.com> wrote: >> G-S wrote: > >>> So I'd like to see a government with proportional voting and without >>> preferences, because preferences distort the result so that the largest >>> proportion of voters chosen representative doesn't get elected. >> Not true at all. I think you don't know how preferential voting works. >> The preferences give you a second chance, and a third chance, and a >> fourth chance. If your preferred candidate didn't get enough votes to >> win the seat outright, why wouldn't you want your second choice getting >> your vote, and if they can't win, why wouldn't you want your third >> choice to get your vote? The least voted against candidate wins. > > That is part of the problem. You get the person you least object to, > rather than the person you want. It's not a problem at all. If the person you want has enough votes they win. See. Amazing, but true. You get the person you want. If they can't win, your second choice gets your vote, and so on. If your preference, a proportional voting model was used, how do you get the person you want? Nev.. '08 DL1000K8
From: hippo on 8 Feb 2010 02:41 GWD wrote: > > On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 06:39:07 GMT, Andrew wrote: > > >On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 15:02:24 +1100, Nev.. wrote: > > > >> Andrew wrote: > >>> On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:06:44 +1100, G-S wrote: > >>> > >>>> Andrew wrote: > >>>>> If you buy one, it is because you want those two things, or you want > >>>>> people to think you want those two things. Either way, you're a hoon. > >>>>> Even if you never do a wheelie on your litre-class sports bike, and > >>>>> you always stick to speed limits, you're still a hoon. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> I have to disagree with that. > >>>> > >>>> If a person never speeds, never wheelies, never breaks the law and > >>>> rides a litre-class sports bike they are NOT a hoon. > >>>> > >>>> They no doubt want people to think they are a hoon (or the 2nd coming > >>>> of M Doohan) but that doesn't make them one. > >>>> > >>>> At best they are FAIL at hoon... > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> G-S > >>> > >>> Would you settle for 'wannabe' hoon? Nobody buys a sports bike for its > >>> touring capability, or its baggage handling, or its ground clearance. > >>> The fact that the rider doesn't behave like a hoon doesn't alter the > >>> motivation for the purchase. > >> > >> Most of my motivation for buying highpowered sports bikes has been being > >> comfort and laziness. Whats going to happen is you're going to have to > >> define sports bike and hoon to within a very narrow definition and the > >> real world will trip you over with diversity. So lets start by defining > >> 'sportsbike'. > >> > >> Nev.. > >> '08 DL1000K8' > > > >OK. Let's start with 'The Most Sporting Bike Class Defined By The > >Manufacturer'. For example, Kawasaki make bikes they classify as 'Sport' > >and 'Supersport'. We take the 'Supersport' category and we get the ZX-6R > >Ninja, the ZX-10R Ninja and the ZX-14. OK, Suzuki next. They have bikes > >they classify as 'Sport / Sport Touring' and 'Supersport'. We take the > >'Supersport' category and we get the GSX-R600, the GSX-R750, the GSX- > >R1000 and the Hayabusa. > > > >I'm happy with all of those (actually, I really would be). Want to try > >Ducati? They have categories called 'SportClassic' and 'Superbike'. And > >if you do the obvious and select 'Superbike', you get the 848, 1098R, > >1198 and 1198S. > > > >I could go on but I think Nev.. is snoring. Anyone interested in offering > >a contradictory example? > > Well at the risk of curing Nev's insomnia even more, I think you have > given an excellent run-down on how Manufacturers see their products, > and from that point of view I agree with you. I would be interested in > an owner's definition of a sports bike, and which bikes fit that > category. As I see it, there are bikes that are enjoyable that go > fast, and others that just go fast. All are sold to mere mortals, a > lot of whom don't seem to know what they are getting themselves into > (count me in that group). What picture should be in my head when I'm > talking about a sports bike? > The rear mirror image receding at a more rapid rate than normal? The motorcycle proceeding ditto? -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: Nev.. on 8 Feb 2010 02:45
G-S wrote: > Nev.. wrote: >> G-S wrote: >>> Nev.. wrote: >>>> G-S wrote: >>>>> Marts wrote: >>>>>> G-S wrote... >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have private health care and so do all my family, I haven't >>>>>>> used the public health system in over 20 years. >>>>>> >>>>>> You would have. For example, every time you pulled out your >>>>>> Medicare card. Or if >>>>>> you're admitted to the ED, which is paid for by Medicare. >>>>> >>>>> I haven't been to an emergency department in over 20 years. >>>>> >>>>> The only times I've been in hospital in more than 20 years I've >>>>> been in private hospital. >>>>> >>>>>> And the PBS for prescription drugs. >>>>> >>>>> I actually am on regular prescriptions, plus aspirin. >>>>> >>>>> None of the prescriptions I am on are on the PBS (although there >>>>> are less effective alternatives that are in the PBS list) and >>>>> aspirin I buy over the counter. >>>>> >>>>> Try again... >>>> >>>> LOL. Are you naive enough to think that when you attend a private >>>> hospital, they don't claim 100% of your Medicare entitlement on your >>>> behalf? LOL. >>> >>> I never said the private hospital hadn't benefited from public >>> health, I said I had not. >> >> And you can't see how the private hospital receiving money on your >> behalf for services they provide to you, is to your benefit? Really? >> > > I would use the private hospital no matter what the cost of that > hospital to me. > > The government subsidizing those private hospitals reduces the cost to > me of course, which means I receive a benefit from the private hospital > subsidies. > > But the benefit I receive is less than (substantially less than) the tax > that I pay (and that applies to the total of benefits that I receive). > > So the NET benefit is negative. Must be hard work shifting those goalposts around so much. ! Nev.. '08 DL1000K8 |